This is a reply to Map Gripes.
#1. Too small grid. I think the new layout of Dungeon has fixed this.
#2. I disagree with Merric. I want all the maps to be using the 5-foot grid.
#3. I prefer maps that line up exactly with the grid also.
Now to other topics. I think the new logo is fine. And I like that I can see the cover art without the "cover lines."
You have an ad for a reader survey. When will that be happening?
Downer needs to go. It would work if it was published twice a week. It is 7 episodes short every month.
I like what you have done with Dungeon. Keep up the good work.
Peace and smiles :)
j.
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
Jaws,
The survey should appear in the next couple of days.
Issue #116 includes a "The Story So Far" article for Downer than will bring readers up to speed. Give it a look and let us know what you think. I personally love the strip, but it is admittedly difficult to follow a story told in two-page chunks.
--Erik Mona
Editor-in-Chief
Dungeon
This is a reply to Map Gripes.
I wish I had my copy of #115 so that I could see what you're replying about...
Rauol,
Then you should subscribe :)
My two cents, otherwise:
- Logo is fine and new cover designs lets artwork breathe.
- None of the cartoons float my boat. I like the graphic quality of DOWNER, but I think it's storyline is a bit esoteric. Could care less about the characters, and that's what it's all about, right? Characters?
- I spent too much time looking for that stupid reader survey too. Don't run an ad for something if it isn't available yet.
|
Senior Software Developer
|
- I spent too much time looking for that stupid reader survey too. Don't run an ad for something if it isn't available yet.
Please accept our apologies for the survey! It will be ready soon.
The magazines -- and their ads -- are put together several weeks before you get them. As you can probably tell, it was a pretty big task putting together the new site, and that had to be done before we could work on the survey code. Rest assured, it's nearly done, and you can expect to see the survey by early next week. (Keeping in mind that it's a holiday here on Monday....)
Oh, and don't worry about having to hunt for it. We'll make sure it's easy to find. :-)
I think the maps are just fine. That guy obviously has an opinion about it, but I think the maps need to be 5ft squares to support the standard movement of PC's in the game.
Maps are fine IMO.
While the font of the front cover is really irrelevant I do like the layout where you can actually see the artwork!I hated the dumbazz way they used to have those silly "headlines" all over the cover.
Looks nice now. Don't change it.
In general I like the maps. Sometimes they get hard to read though, and readability is really the KEY. Some maps are best shown in 10' squares, I like for large scale areas.
I'd like tactical battle maps either a few with each issue, or downloadable of the web site. This is especially true for cave locations that I find hard to correctly draw out on the 3.5 ft x 4 ft gridded chalk board that I use for a playing surface in my game.
As for maps for the adventures, a standard 5 ft grid is best. If you don't have room for large maps that would require multiple pages at this scale, you can always use the space slotted for Wil Save ;-)
ASEO out
I think the maps are just fine. That guy obviously has an opinion about it, but I think the maps need to be 5ft squares to support the standard movement of PC's in the game.
It's worth having a look at the map of Maure Castle and then trying to decipher it or use it with miniatures. Eek!
I've no problem with a 5' scale if used appropriately. "Appropriately" is an interesting term, of course. :)
In general, what I mean is this: if a chamber is extremely big (and there are several in Maure Castle), then a 10' scale is more appropriate because it makes it easier to judge the size. When you have a chamber over a hundred feet across, the 5' scale just doesn't work. If the biggest room is about 40x40', then the 5' scale presents no problems at all.
Then too, the size of the actual squares is an issue. At 4-5mm a square, it's easy to see them, and easy to count them. At 2mm per square, my eyes begin to hurt, especially if they are drawn fainter than the walls (as they should be).
Maure Castle also has a problem with the grid having little relationship to the walls, even though the original module had maps that were properly aligned!
Cheers,
Merric Blackman
but I think the maps need to be 5ft squares to support the standard movement of PC's in the game.
No, they don't, and the maps will *still* support standard movement.
I'm with Merric on this one - the scale of the map should be appropriate for the size of the location. For large locations, it is absolutely inappropriate using 5' squares.
Merric, all you did was repeat yourself from the letter in the magazine.
I would rather see a huge map cut down into sections if it means keeping 5 feet = square. Of course this means only the maps that are needed for battle.
Peace and smiles :)
j.
Merric, all you did was repeat yourself from the letter in the magazine.
I would rather see a huge map cut down into sections if it means keeping 5 feet = square. Of course this means only the maps that are needed for battle.
Peace and smiles :)
j.
I haven't seen the issue yet, so I'm not sure how Erik edited my letter. (Nice to see he used the points I still hold and that I haven't changed my mind! ;^))
Cheers!
Rauol,
Then you should subscribe :)
I do... In fact, my copy of #115 just arrived in the mail today.
I think the maps are just fine. That guy obviously has an opinion about it, but I think the maps need to be 5ft squares to support the standard movement of PC's in the game.It's worth having a look at the map of Maure Castle and then trying to decipher it or use it with miniatures. Eek!
I've no problem with a 5' scale if used appropriately. "Appropriately" is an interesting term, of course. :)
In general, what I mean is this: if a chamber is extremely big (and there are several in Maure Castle), then a 10' scale is more appropriate because it makes it easier to judge the size. When you have a chamber over a hundred feet across, the 5' scale just doesn't work. If the biggest room is about 40x40', then the 5' scale presents no problems at all.
Then too, the size of the actual squares is an issue. At 4-5mm a square, it's easy to see them, and easy to count them. At 2mm per square, my eyes begin to hurt, especially if they are drawn fainter than the walls (as they should be).
Maure...
Yeah Merric,
I was making a statement about the maps in general, I like the 5ft squares. I wasn't opening a dialogue or interested in why they should be 10ft. I was saying my vote is for 5ft squares, makes it easier on me as a DM, but thanks. :)
I haven't seen the issue yet, so I'm not sure how Erik edited my letter. (Nice to see he used the points I still hold and that I haven't changed my mind! ;^))
Cheers!
Sorry, MerricB. I forgot you are from the lands down under and you have to wait longer.
Peace and smiles :)
j.
One thing that can irk me about the use of 5' squares recently (and it's not for aesthetic reasons) is the occurence of 5' wide passageways.
I don't mind 5' passageways _except_ when combat starts taking place in them, because suddenly most of the party can't engage (or be engaged) in combat.
It's nice every so often, it gets tiresome after a while.
Cheers,
Merric